MTV has decided it will not air advertisements from a pro-life group bemoaning the fact that abortion targets the black community and African-Americans have the highest percentage of abortions.

Heroic Media, an organization supported by Sarah Palin and Lila Rose, wanted to run commercials saying “The most dangerous place for African-American children is the womb.” The organization said it planned to purchase ads on MTV during a recent fundraising Palin headlined, but the Washington Independent confirmed MTV will not allow it.

“Upon further review, it was hard for us [MTV] to separate some of the recent tactics of the organization behind the campaign and the ads themselves, so we [MTV] have opted to not accept them for air this time,” a spokesman told the liberal publication.

MTV was also running other Heroic Media pro-life ads that did not touch on the high black abortion rate but officials said the cable network will no longer continue running them, as they had been after midnight. The ads, “Teen Angst” and “We Can Help,” ran from May to November 2010 but MTV spokeswoman Jeannie Kedas says the network will no longer accept ads from Heroic Media.

Kedas said the MTV standards department decided against airing any further ads and told the Independent that Heroic Media was notified of the decision a week after its April 30th fundraiser where it announced it would try to run the ads on MTV again. Still, Heroic Media communications director Kimberly Guidry told the publication that MTV had not notified it of the decision as of May 9.

A separate organization, according to the media web site Jezebel, is advertising during the program Teen Mom. Those ads, promoting the crisis pregnancy web site OptionLine are supported by Care Net and Heartbeat International.

The controversy over the MTV and other black abortion ads started when a billboard another pro-life group ran in New York City, highlighting a report showing abortions decimate the black community there, came under criticism from people who made allegations that the ad was racist in nature. Pro-abortion activists in New York City forced the removal of the billboard the pro-life group Life Always paid for to draw attention to the fact that abortions kill 300,000 black unborn children annually.

In fact, new data put out by the CDC today indicates black babies are victims of abortions at a much higher rate than their white or Hispanic counterparts.

The billboard, located in SoHo, beared an image of a young black girl and says “The most dangerous place for an African-American is in the womb.”

Kedas said the MTV standards department decided against airing any further ads and told the Independent that Heroic Media was notified of the decision a week after its April 30th fundraiser where it announced it would try to run the ads on MTV again

WHAT?! MTV has a "Standards Department"??!!

That has to be one of the most contradictory things I have ever heard in my life.

The Pennsylvania House of Representatives on Wednesday passed HB 574, a bill that responds to the horrifying discoveries at the abortion business ran by Kermit Gosnell that had numerous violations and where babies were killed in abortion-infanticides.

The bill, sponsored by State Representative Matt Baker, is a response to the grand jury report in the Kermit Gosnell abortion center case in West Philadelphia. Gosnell and members of his unlicensed staff are charged with the murders of seven newborn babies and one female patient as a result of what has been described as an abortion center “house of horrors.”

“Nail salons receive greater oversight than abortion centers in Pennsylvania,” said Maria Vitale, Education Director for the Pennsylvania Pro-Life Federation. “The women of Pennsylvania deserve better, and that’s why the Pennsylvania House had to act.”

Vitale said the bill was needed because “state regulators ignored complaints and failed to visit the Women’s Medical Society for years. The Gosnell case is a wake-up call for Pennsylvania, and shows that greater scrutiny of abortion facilities is needed to prevent such tragedies in the future.”

“Gosnell’s abortion center was inspected only after a federal drug raid in 2010. It was the first time the facility had been inspected in 17 years,” she said.

The ACLU-PA and Planned Parenthood teamed up to oppose the measure with the ACLU mounting

a video campaign through the social networking site Facebook to oppose the legislation. The organization, which supports legal abortion, says that the bill would cost abortion operations hundreds of thousands of dollars in building renovations and staffing increases and would result in the closing of abortion centers.

In an interview with the website PoliticsPA, Rep. Baker responded, “Why do they feel that they should not have to undergo the same patient health safety standards as other facilities, this just defies logic.”

Baker has introduced two other pieces of legislation in response to the Gosnell tragedy. HB 907 would expand the statute of limitations for late-term abortions and infanticide, while HB 908 would increase the penalties for impersonating a physician.

A grand jury [.pdf] concluded that state regulators failed in their duty to provide oversight to Gosnell’s abortion center. Philadelphia District Attorney Seth Williams told state Senate panels that the grand jury was upset with representatives of the Departments of Health and State who seemed “more interested in protecting the interest of the departments than the interests of women and young girls.”

Still, the grand jury did not charge any state authorities in the probe. Pennsylvania taxpayers paid more than $100,000 in legal fees for attorneys representing state officials who were called before the grand jury.

The prosecutors who testified before the Senate hearing said, since news reports of the criminal case emerged, they have been receiving calls daily from former patients of Gosnell.

There was “more oversight of women’s hair salons and nail salons” than over abortion facilities in Pennsylvania, according to Williams.

Williams said Gosnell’s facility was responsible for “horrific and barbaric treatment of women and young girls.” But, despite dozens of lawsuits being filed against Gosnell, state officials did not take action until after a federal drug raid of his abortion center.

Pennsylvania health department officials stopped conducting yearly inspections of abortion centers under former Governor Tom Ridge, citing concerns that the inspections would create a barrier for women’s access to abortion. As a result, Gosnell’s facility was not inspected for 17 years.

According to prosecutors, Gosnell’s patients paid from $330 to $2500 for each abortion. He reportedly earned $1.8 million a year from his abortion trade.

Prosecutors say Gosnell taught his unlicensed, unqualified staff to take ultrasounds in such a way that the true size and age of the unborn baby were disguised. Under Pennsylvania law, abortions are illegal after 24 weeks unless the mother’s life is seriously threatened or when the pregnancy would result in irreversible impairment of a bodily function. The fraudulent ultrasounds permitted him to perform abortions well past the cut-off point established under the state’s landmark Abortion Control Act.

But Gosnell went beyond performing abortions, allowing late-term babies to be delivered live, then severing their spinal cords with scissors.

Much of Gosnell’s clientele consisted of low-income minority women and immigrants who were particularly vulnerable to Gosnell’s allegedly criminal practices.

“So many of the women were poor—maybe no one heard their voices,” Williams said.

Gosnell and several staffers at his abortion center, including his wife Pearl, were arrested in January after a grand jury indicted them on multiple charges after officials raided his abortion business following a woman’s death and discovered a “shop of horrors” filled with bags of bodies and body parts of deceased unborn children and babies killed in infanticides.

Members of the North Carolina state House Appropriations Committee engaged in a jaw-dropping debate on Thursday — to determine if it is better that children not be killed in an abortion or save the state money.

Lawmakers debated a bill the House Judiciary Subcommittee B recommended earlier this month on a 9-5 vote that broke along party lines. That panel approved legislation to make it so women are given information about abortion’s risks and alternatives they don’t normally receive from abortion clinics. The panel approved the Woman’s Right to Know bill, H 854, that other states have passed and that has been proven to reduce abortions. When women are given information about abortion that Planned Parenthood and other abortion businesses don’t routinely provide, they frequently consider alternatives.

But, today, members of the appropriations committee debated a fiscal note legislative staff attached to the bill saying it would result in more than 2,900 births of children annually who may otherwise have become victims of abortion. The made the estimates based on similar legislation in Mississippi that resulted in abortion reductions and claimed the births would cost the state approximately $7 million a year in Medicaid expenses.

Rep. Burt Jones of Rockingham was incredulous and said, according to WRAL, that he couldn’t believe legislators were debating whether more abortions or more expenses were better.

“To me, it is incredible that we would even debate the idea that somehow we can improve the fiscal impact of this state by not allowing children to be born,” he said. “I’m a fiscal conservative, but if we’ve got to pay a little more money in this state because more children have the right to be born, then so be it.”

But Democratic Rep. Beverly Earle stood up for the save money side of the abortion debate.

“Most women have thought about having an abortion. It’s not something that I would think that they would take lightly,” she claimed. “I think it’s a true insult to women to imply or say that they don’t know what they’re doing.”

Committee chairman Rep. Justin Burr, a Republican, also responded to complaints from Democrats that the bill would cost money in terms of producing a web site to provide women information about pregnancy centers offering abortion alternatives, brochures to give to women, and the cost of other materials and staff time. He said money in the budget could cover the modest expenses.

He also countered the cost-saving claims by having fiscal staff look at the financial impact on the state of women who give birth following an abortion, because of the increased risk of birth defects associated with post-abortion subsequent births. Fiscal staff indicated that added costs for neonatal care, according to WRAP, would amount to $39 million annually — more than recovering the costs of the Medicaid expenses.

After the debate, the Appropriations Committee approved the bill 6-4, the radio station indicated.

North Carolina is one of 16 states that doesn’t require a waiting period and counseling before an abortion. The law would allow women a chance to see an ultrasound of their unborn child at least four hours before an abortion and abortion centers that don’t provide the information to women can be subject to a civil lawsuit.

In the first committee, AP indicates Sylinthia Stewart, 45, of Fayetteville, supported the bill because she had three abortions in four states and never got any information about how it would affect her and destroy the life of a unique human being.

“Black women need to be educated. We are the ones they are hiding the truth from. I am sorry about your circumstance, but that does not give anyone else the right to hide it from me,” said Stewart, who backed the measure. “This bill will protect black women. The women who actually have abortions need more information.”

A new study conducted by the Brookings Institution essentially says the government pays too much money on children born from unintended pregnancies who may otherwise have become victims of abortion.

The non-profit organization says unintended pregnancies, that could be prevented with abortion or efforts promoting contraception or birth control, cost the federal and state governments more than $11 billion a year.

Adam Thomas, research director at the institution’s Center on Children and Families and co-author of the paper, told the Dow Jones News service: “You’re not going to balance the budget by implementing pregnancy-prevention policies–it’s a small slice of the pie,” but he said governments could reduce the cost of the pregnancies by doing more to promote such programs.

Thomas and co-author Emily Monea estimate governments spent between $9.6 billion and $12.6 billion on more than 1.2 million unintended pregnancies in 2001 and that the money covered 168, 000 abortions, 782,000 births and medical care for infants five or younger because women who unintentionally get pregnancy are of lower income and would qualify for the medical care and abortion costs in states that pay for abortions with taxpayer funds.

“I don’t think the main reason for implementing these programs should be saving government dollars, but it’s certainly a great benefit,” Monea told Dow Jones.

Planned Parenthood, which benefits from more than $350 million in government funding of its birth control and family planning efforts, naturally applauded the results of the survey.

“If anyone doubted that affordable birth control is good for families and good for taxpayers, these new findings should set the record straight,” Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, said in a statement.

But Wendy Wright, the president of Concerned Women for America, told LifeNews.com in response that they survey makes it appear it is finally better to devalue human life by funding the Planned Parenthood abortion business or promoting abortions on children conceived in unplanned pregnancies.

“The researchers have a bizarre way of looking at children, and clearly do not understand women,” she said. “While a pregnancy may be ‘unintended’ it does not mean the child is unwanted by the mother or others, nor of any less value as a person than the researchers who mislabel them.”

“Government funding of Planned Parenthood-type pregnancy-prevention programs has not decreased the number of pregnancies that they call ‘unintended’. In fact, the more government funding that Planned Parenthood receives, the more abortions it commits,” she said.

As far as I’m concerned, there’s a circle in Hell reserved for late-term abortionists. But this is the Obama era, so Hollywood makes TV shows casting them as heroic figures. Such is the state of our popular culture.

On the May 12 episode of ABC’s “Private Practice,” Dr. Addison Montgomery (played by actress Kate Walsh, a real-life Planned Parenthood activist) spewed the strongest pro-abortion — “pro-choice” — rhetoric as she performed a partial-birth abortion on a woman who thought she’d already had an abortion two months before.

“I hate what I’m about to do, but I support Patty’s right to choose,” the doctor declares. “It is not enough just to have an opinion, because in a nation of over 300 million people, there are only 1,700 abortion providers. And I’m one of them.”

The poor, poor killer of babies. ABC should have cued the orchestra to swell up and champion the few and the proud, followed by the on-screen credit, “This message brought to you by Planned Parenthood.” It was that blatant.

There were no cheers for this very special episode from the usual liberal TV critics, and feminist groups weren’t shaking pom-poms either. But there’s probably a Planned Parenthood “Maggie Award for Media Excellence” in ABC’s future. Walsh won this award in 2008 for her “extensive advocacy efforts on behalf of affordable family planning services and real sex education.”

The tension in the “Private Practice” plot came from the show’s pro-life character, African-American fertility specialist Dr. Naomi Bennett. When she first protests the partial-birth abortion, Addison argues, “Partial birth is not a medical term, it’s a political term, and you know it.”

Naomi replies, “I don’t care what you call it, you can’t do it.”

Another female character chimes in, “Yes, she can. It’s at the doctor’s discretion. And it is legal.”

Naturally, ABC wasn’t about to be very specific about how grisly the partial-birth abortion is, as Addison euphemistically proclaims to the patient it involves “forceps and suction,” and “the fetus would be removed.” Naomi later protests that it crushed a baby’s skull. But she’s the controversial one.

When pregnant Patty comes to the office to consult with Addison, Naomi tries to talk her out of an abortion, telling her that her baby, at 19 weeks in the womb, can hear her mother talk and be startled by loud noises and has vocal cords and fingerprints. With a gentle smile, she insists, “Consider carrying the baby to term.”

This puts Patty on the fence, infuriating Addison. The scene shifts to Patty’s workplace, a bar, where Addison arrives to talk her back into the abortion.

“She had no right to upset you like that,” she insists.

If pro-lifers discuss facts about fetal development and plead that parenthood isn’t a prison sentence, somehow that unfairly interferes with “choice.”

Montgomery uncorks another pro-abortion lecture at the bar: “When it comes to abortion, everybody has an opinion. Everybody’s going to want to tell you what to do. If this were 1972, it would have been a back alley and not my elevator you would have collapsed in. You didn’t have a choice. Now you do.” She claims to Patty “everyone else is background noise.” This is not an offering of “choice.” This is an urgent appeal for an abortion.

Of course, the doctor added those fiendish and violent pro-lifers are always ruining the Era of Choice.

“It’s still hard. And even after you make the most difficult and personal decision that there is, it’s still not safe. Because you have some fanatic who claims to value life who can walk into an abortion clinic and blow it up.”

It’s the ultimate Orwellian argument. We live in a country where 4,000 abortions are performed daily and it’s the pro-lifers who are killers.

Gallup released its annual abortion poll today showing Americans want all or most abortions made illegal and saying they believe abortion to be morally wrong, but the poll found Americans split on what they call their abortion position.

The Gallup polling firm conducted a national survey from May 5-8 with a random sample of 1,018 adults, aged 18 and older from across the nation. The poll has a 4 percentage point margin of error.

By a 24 percent margin, 61-37 percent, Americans take the pro-life view that abortions should either be legal under no circumstances or legal only under a few circumstances. Although Gallup doesn’t specify those “few” circumstances, polling data has consistently shown that, when asked about cases such as rape, incest, or the life of the mother, a majority of Americans want all or almost all abortions made illegal — leaving only life of the mother or rape and incest as the exceptions.

“Americans are rather conservative in their stance on abortion, with 61% now preferring that abortion be legal in only a few circumstances or no circumstances. By contrast, 37% want abortion legal in all or most circumstances,” Gallup analyst Lydia Saad writes. “Over the past two decades, Americans have consistently leaned toward believing abortion should be legal in only a few or no circumstances, although less so in the mid-1990s than since about 1997, when combined support for these has averaged close to 60%.”

In fact, Gallup polling shows that, since 1994, a majority of Americans have held a pro-life view wanting all or almost all abortions made illegal — and that pro-life view has strengthened with an average of 60 percent of Americans saying that over the years.

Breaking down those numbers further, Gallup finds that pro-life view as seen across the board — with 60 percent of women and 61 percent of men saying they want all or almost all abortions illegal. Women actually take a stronger pro-life view than men with 24 percent of American women wanting all abortions made illegal and 36 percent wanting almost all illegal, compared with 19 percent of men who want to ban all abortions and 42 percent of men who want to prohibit almost all.

By age, Americans also oppose abortions — with 59 percent of people aged 18-34, 58 percent of those 35-54 and 64 percent of those over the age of 55 saying all or almost all abortions should become illegal. Younger Americans are most supportive of making all abortions illegal, with 24 percent of 18-34 year-olds saying so and 35 percent saying they want abortions legal only in a few circumstances.

THERE are those who, when it suits their purpose, say that there are no natural rights, but that all rights spring from the grant of the sovereign political power. It were waste of time to argue with such persons. There are some facts so obvious as to be beyond the necessity of argument. And one of these facts, attested by universal consciousness, is that there are rights as between man and man which existed before the formation of government, and which continue to exist in spite of the abuse of government; that there is a higher law than any human law -- to wit, the law of the Creator, impressed upon and revealed through nature, which is before and above human laws, and upon conformity to which all human laws must depend for their validity. To deny this is to assert that there is no standard whatever by which the rightfulness or wrongfulness of laws and institutions can be measured; to assert that there can be no actions in themselves right and none in themselves wrong; to assert that an edict which commanded mothers to kill their children should receive the same respect as a law prohibiting infanticide.

These natural rights, this higher law, form the only true and sure basis for social organization. Just as, if we would construct a successful machine, we must conform to physical laws, such as the law of gravitation, the law of combustion, the law of expansion, etc.; just as, if we would maintain bodily health, we must conform to the laws of physiology; so, if we would have a peaceful and healthful social state, we must conform our institutions to the great moral laws -- laws to which we are absolutely subject, and which are as much above our control as are the laws of matter and of motion. And as, when we find that a machine will not work, we infer that in its construction some law of physics has been ignored or defied, so when we find social disease and political evils may we infer that in the organization of society moral law has been defied and the natural rights of man have been ignored.

These natural rights of man are thus set forth in the American Declaration of Independence as the basis upon which alone legitimate government can rest:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident -- that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that, whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundations on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as shall seem to them most likely to effect their safety and happiness."

So does the preamble to the Constitution of the United States appeal to the same principles:

"We, the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

And so, too, is the same fundamental and self-evident truth set forth in that grand Declaration of the Rights of Man and of Citizens, issued by the National Assembly of France in 1789:

Add supermodel Kathy Ireland to the list of people wanting Congress to de-fund the Planned Parenthood abortion business by cutting the millions of dollars it receives to promote its agenda.

“I think Planned Parenthood needs to reassess and look at what their values are, what their mission is, what their goals are, and do they deserve government funding? For example, there are non-profits that I’m involved with, and we don’t get government funding,” Ireland told FOX411’s Pop Tarts program. “We go out there, and if you really believe in this strongly enough to fight it for it, go get the funding.

“To force people who don’t agree with some of the practices, I don’t believe in that. I don’t think tax payers need to fund something as controversial as [Planned Parenthood],’ she added.

Ireland is not new to holding steadfast pro-life views when it comes to abortion, but the fold the Fox program it has cost her friends in the entertainment industry.

“I’ve never set out to win a popularity contest. I came from [being previously pro-choice], but when I was confronted with the science – and I spoke to top scientists throughout our country asking, ‘Would you please just show me some shred of evidence that the unborn is not a human being?’ and no one has been able to show me any, and I will continue to fight for those human rights until someone can show me otherwise,” she continued. “So a lot of people get mad at me, but that’s okay. I listen to criticism because sometimes there are things to learn, even if it’s wrapped in a nasty package.”

On January 22, 1973, the Supreme Court handed down its decision in Roe v. Wade. That same day, the Court also decided Doe v. Bolton. In Roe, the Court struck down a Texas abortion law. In Doe, the Court threw out the restrictions on abortion in a more liberal Georgia law. The combined result overturned the laws that restricted abortion in every state.

In Roe, the Supreme Court adopted a trimester framework for state regulation of abortion. The Court held: in the first trimester of pregnancy, states may not regulate abortion; in the second trimester, states may regulate abortion only in ways related to protecting the mother’s health; and in the third trimester, states may “regulate, and even proscribe, abortion except where necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother.” But the language that seemed to allow a third trimester ban on abortion was deceptive, because in Doe, the Court gave “health” such a broad definition that states have been prevented from successfully imposing bans on abortion, including late-term abortions.

The Supreme Court ruled that a restriction on abortion is a violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which protects the right to privacy. Delivering the Court’s opinion in Roe, Justice Blackmun wrote, “This right of privacy … founded in the Fourteenth Amendment’s concept of personal liberty and restrictions upon state action … is broad enough to encompass a woman’s decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy.”

Even pro-abortion proponents admit that Roe is intellectually indefensible. Edward Lazarus, a former clerk to Blackmun, wrote, “What, exactly, is the problem with Roe? The problem, I believe, is that it has little connection to the Constitutional right it purportedly interpreted. A constitutional right to privacy broad enough to include abortion has no meaningful foundation in constitutional text, history, or precedent.”

Blackmun claimed that a fetus isn’t a person within the language and meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment. He noted that “the Constitution does not define ‘person’ in so many words.” The word “has application only postnatally.” He observed that state laws restricting abortion “are not of ancient or even of common-law origin.” The laws derive from changes “in the latter half of the nineteenth century.” So, the word person as used in the Fourteenth Amendment “does not include the unborn.”

Each of these arguments falls apart under scrutiny. First, the Constitution doesn’t define person, but the Constitution doesn’t define privacy either. The Supreme Court applied a double standard in Roe, arbitrarily giving the word person a narrow definition and the word privacy a broad definition in order to rationalize its decision to legalize abortion-on-demand. Second, if a fetus isn’t a person because the provisions of the Constitution don’t apply to a fetus, then infants aren’t persons either, because the provisions also don’t apply to infants. Or adolescents in some instances. Third, it’s irrelevant if state abortion laws were less restrictive in the past. Many laws were less restrictive in the past. And it’s irrelevant if state abortion laws originate from statutes not common-law. Many laws originate from statutes. Fourth, when the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted in 1868, abortion was already restricted by at least 36 laws enacted by state or territorial legislatures, including the very Texas law the Supreme Court struck down in Roe. Or in other words, state or territorial laws restricting abortion were already recognized when the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted: the Amendment wasn’t intended to overturn laws restricting abortion. Clearly, the Fourteenth Amendment has always included the “unborn” as “persons” entitled to Constitutional protection.

A black pro-life activist responsible for creating earlier billboard campaigns that drew national attention is back with a new creative and a new message for how the abortion industry targets black Americans: “Abortion Enslaves Us.”

That’s the message behind a series of billboards that will go up in the Atlanta, Georgia area sponsored by the Radiance Foundation and celebrating Juneteenth (June 19th) and the liberation of black Americans from the shackles of slavery. Ryan Bomberger, the head of the foundation says the billboards are meant to “expose the epidemic of abortion” and 50 of them will be place in metro and downtown Atlanta.

“The campaign invokes the Reconstruction Amendments and the abortion industry’s dependence upon certain persons being classified as property,” Bomberger explains. “The landmark Roe v. Wade decision relied upon the perversion of the 14th Amendment, which finally ascribed full humanity to African-Americans, to justify stripping humanity from another group of individuals — the unborn.”

“In NYC, where Planned Parenthood is headquartered, this dehumanization results in the abortion of 60% of all black pregnancies. Here in Georgia, nearly 60% of all abortions are on African-Americans,” Bomberger continued.

“Roe v. Wade has made a mockery of Civil Rights history by offering destruction and bondage instead of possibility and freedom. There is no freedom in the mass exodus of fathers in the black community. There is no freedom in the poverty perpetuated by abortion. There is no freedom in using death as a solution to Life,” Bomberger says.

The NAACP is not happy with a new campaign sponsored by a black pro-life advocate that has new billboards placed in Atlanta, Georgia with the message “Abortion Enslaves Us” and “The 14th Amendment Made Us Members. Abortion Dismembers.”

The campaign is the brainchild of Ryan Bomberger, the head of the Radiance Foundation and the billboards were set up to celebrate Juneteenth (June 19th) and the liberation of black Americans from the shackles of slavery. They are meant to “expose the epidemic of abortion.”

“The campaign invokes the Reconstruction Amendments and the abortion industry’s dependence upon certain persons being classified as property,” Bomberger explains. “The landmark Roe v. Wade decision relied upon the perversion of the 14th Amendment, which finally ascribed full humanity to African-Americans, to justify stripping humanity from another group of individuals — the unborn.”

“In NYC, where Planned Parenthood is headquartered, this dehumanization results in the abortion of 60% of all black pregnancies. Here in Georgia, nearly 60% of all abortions are on African-Americans,” Bomberger continued.

But, in an interview with the liberal Huffington Post, Hilary Shelton, director of the Washington bureau of the NAACP, condemned the billboards.

“Comparing abortion to slavery certainly raises major concerns,” he said. “Women are not forced to have abortions the way they were in servitude. Slavery was about not having the right to make any decisions. Women were actually bred to produce children for the purposes of profit. This is so far removed from that, that if it weren’t such a serious issue, it would almost be laughable.”

Bomberger responded saying the campaign “must be doing something right” if the NAACP is attacking it.

The NAACP is not new to controversy when it comes to abortion and, in April, NAACP officials rushed to defend the nation’s largest abortion business after videos were released showing Planned Parenthood staffers helping alleged sex trafficking ring operators.

Dozens of new restrictions passed by states this year have chipped away at the right to abortion by requiring women to view ultrasounds, imposing waiting periods or cutting funds for clinics. But a new kind of law has gone beyond such restrictions, striking at the foundation of the abortion rules set out by the Supreme Court over the last four decades.

These laws, passed in six states in little more than a year, ban abortions at the 20th week after conception, based on the theory that the fetus can feel pain at that point — a notion disputed by mainstream medical organizations in the United States and Britain. Opponents of abortion say they expect that discussion of fetal pain — even in the face of scientific criticism — will alter public perception of abortion, and they have made support for the new laws a litmus test for Republicans seeking the presidency.

“The purpose of this type of bill is to focus on the humanity of the unborn child,” said Mary Spaulding Balch, director of state legislation for the National Right to Life Committee. “Fetal pain is something that people who are in the middle on the abortion issue can relate to.”

Since Nebraska passed the first 20-week limit last year, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Oklahoma and, this month, Alabama have followed. A similar law has advanced in the Iowa legislature, and anti-abortion campaigners have vowed to promote such laws in more states next year.

In the warped mind of MSNBC’s Chris Matthews, efforts to regulate the practice of abortion are morally equivalent to literacy tests in the South that were aimed at preventing African-Americans from voting.

The “Hardball” host made that puzzling and arguably insulting comparison on the June 30 program in a segment titled “What’s the Matter with Kansas?”

“Kansas may be on track to become the first state in the country to put an end to abortion,” Matthews told his audience yesterday, explaining that:

A new law requires the state’s abortion providers to comply with strict new regulations that set equipment, temperature and space requirements, and the Associated Press reports that as of today, only one of the state’s three clinics met those requirements. Two others were denied permission to operate, effectively shutting them down (when the law takes effect) tomorrow.

Before the commercial break, Matthews had promised “both sides” of the debate, but in truth supplied only one side, interviewing a left-leaning reporter and then an abortion rights activist.

Laura, give us a sense, is that true, is this basically setting a whole bunch of conditions like they used to do with literacy tests in the South to keep blacks from voting. Is this a bunch of regulations that basically kill any chance of having an abortion legally in Kansas?

An objective reporter might have been taken aback by Matthews incredibly asinine comparison with the Jim Crow south, but Bassett had no problem with Matthews’ comparison:

That’s what they seem to be and that’s what they’ve done. Actually, I just heard word that the third clinic has been denied a license as well, which means that a woman can no longer get an abortion in Kansas because of these impossible regulations that they were given two weeks to comply with.

For a set of impossible regulations, however, one Planned Parenthood clinic WAS able yesterday, during the 5 p.m. Eastern “Hardball” broadcast to secure a license to continue abortions.

The National Black Prolife Coalition released a new video today saying that, on the anniversary of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the nation should recognize babies in the womb as a class of unprotected human beings targeted by abortion. Members of the coalition include Ryan Bomberg of the Radiance Foundation and Dr. Alveda King, the niece of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Tomorrow marks the anniversary of the historic civil rights legislation, the landmark law that outlawed major forms of discrimination against blacks and women by stopping discriminatory voter requirements.

“This monumental anti-discrimination act falls short of protecting America’s weakest and most vulnerable class of human beings, the babies in the womb. Even the ‘Women’s Rights Movement’ should recognize the harm to the rights of the baby girls in the womb,” King said. “Other monumental events in America’s history also did not foresee the potential harm of failure to protect all innocent unborn babies.”

“President Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation,” King added. “Who would ever dream that by 2011 African American babies would be the most vulnerable people group to be executed by abortion, or that their mothers would be the most targeted market for the abortion industry?”

Life Issues Institute, a nationwide pro-life educational group, is partnering with the National Black Prolife Coalition for the new video.

“The abortion industry kills 1,000 black babies every day in the United States and over 15,000,000 have been killed since 1973,” LII director Brad Mattes says. “That’s more than the entire populations of Los Angeles, Detroit, Atlanta, Boston, Dallas, Washington DC, Oakland, Houston, Philadelphia, Chicago, Miami, and Baltimore combined. In New York City, home of Planned Parenthood, 60% of all black pregnancies are aborted.”

Purpose is impossible without freedom. As one who was adopted and an adoptive father, I know the beauty of possibility and the passion with which people of every race defend human life in all of its stages.

It’s a favorite talking point for abortion apologists, but I know of few pro-life people who are single-issue minded. As if having a singular focus on a human injustice is something to be ashamed of, anyway. Abolitionists had a singular focus to abolish the inhumanity of slavery. Perhaps they should have first worried about housing, health care, job opportunities, and equal pay before they embarked on such a narrow-minded mission.

History is anathema to the abortion industry. Those pesky little historical facts just get in the way of higher profits and abortion quotas. July is the anniversary of the signing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which attempted to eradicate some eugenics-based social policies (i.e. Separate But Equal) that dehumanized people of my complexion. In essence, it enforced the Civil Rights Act of 1875 and the provisions of the 14th and 15th Amendments that provided due process and equal protection under the law as well as voting rights for all citizens.

It’s amazing how some claim racism exists in every institution in America, but when it comes to Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion chain which profits immensely from killing human life, racism couldn’t possibly be the explanation. This is the prevalent mentality of most so-called “leaders” in the black community, the population most impacted by abortion. Eugenics has been the three-corded strand (racism, elimination of the “unfit”, overpopulation mythology) that ties slavery, anti-miscegenation laws, Jim Crow laws, birth control, forced sterilization, Planned Parenthood and the epidemic of abortion together in an inseparable bind.

It is the driving force behind the “pro-choice” establishment’s relentless campaign to justify over a million annual abortions no matter the reason, no matter the cost. We saw the disastrous consequence of this pro-abortion radicalism in Philly’s “House of Horrors” where abortionist Kermit Gosnell’s butchery went unabated for decades, thanks to NARAL’s silence. Women and children were maimed and killed in squalid conditions—all sacrificed at the altar of “choice”. In Philadelphia, 50% of all black pregnancies are aborted. The city’s poverty rate is the highest in 15 years at 25% outpacing all of the largest U.S. cities. This doesn’t look like freedom.

The NAACP’s recent repudiation of The Radiance Foundation speaks volumes about one of the nation’s oldest civil rights organizations. They refuse to do anything to protect the most defenseless and most disenfranchised among us—the unborn. Hilary Shelton, the NAACP’s Senior Vice President for Advocacy (apparently of abortion), attacked our “Juneteenth” billboard campaign in Atlanta, GA, where 60% of all abortions are on black babies. Oddly, he declared that the NAACP doesn’t take a position on the issue while expressing a position on the issue, saying: “Women are not forced to have abortions the way they were in servitude. Slavery was about not having the right to make any decisions. Women were actually bred to produce children for the purposes of profit. This is so far removed from that, that if it weren’t such a seriousissue, it would almost be laughable.”

The only thing laughable in this is Shelton’s recall of history and ignorance of the present peril facing America’s cities. Slaveholders profited from the physical slavery of human beings discarded by our society. Today, Planned Parenthood profits from the discarded children of those no longer physically enslaved. In both cases, personhood has been defined by the government, and ultimately by nine often Supremely wrong justices. The Roe v. Wade decision made a mockery of civil rights history. It bizarrely contorted the 14th Amendment, which finally ascribed personhood to black Americans, in order to strip it away from another class of people—the unborn. In 2004, the NAACP publicly supported the Planned Parenthood/NARAL pro-abortion “March for Women’s Lives” event in DC ridding any questions about its stance on the issue.

The profoundly liberal organization’s unwillingness to even discuss the epidemic level of abortion in the black community begs a more fitting moniker: National Association for the Abortion of Colored People. They’re more concerned about how glaucoma might lead people to blindness than the deliberate blindness toward one of today’s most pressing civil rights issue.

So, if the NAACP so strenuously disagrees with our billboard’s contention that too many are aborted, the converse must be their position: not enough aborted.

You may know the name Reverend Walter Hoye. In 2009, Hoye was sentenced to 30 days in jail and an $1100 fine for carrying a sign outside Oakland abortion clinics that read, “Jesus loves you and your baby. Let us help you!” As women approached the doors of clinics, Hoye would ask, “May I talk to you about alternatives to the clinic?”

Alameda Superior Court Judge Stuart Hing said that he would not have imposed a sentence or fine if Hoye had agreed to refrain from his pro-life activity outside clinics, but Hoye refused. The conviction was later overturned by an appellate court.

An African-American, Hoye is back in the spotlight for placing pro-life messages on billboards, targeting the high rate of abortions in the black community. The billboard campaign has run in Oakland and Los Angeles, as well as several other states.

A LifeNews.com article describes pro-abortion organizations objecting to the “race-based” content of the billboards. But Hoye responds that since 1973 more than 15 million abortions of preborn black children “have crippled the black community.” In fact, a February 2011 report from the Centers for Disease Control reports that nearly 35% of all abortions in the United States are preborn black babies, whereas African-Americans make up only 12.6% of the American population. In other words, black babies are aborted at three times the rate of other races, and comprise 30% of all abortions in the U.S.

"The chief weapon against the teaching of Henry George was that which is always used against irrefutable and self-evident truths. This method, which is still being applied in relation to George, was that of hushing up....People do not argue with the teaching of George, they simply do not know it. (And it is impossible to do otherwise with his teaching, for he who becomes acquainted with it cannot but agree.)"

You may know the name Reverend Walter Hoye. In 2009, Hoye was sentenced to 30 days in jail and an $1100 fine for carrying a sign outside Oakland abortion clinics that read, “Jesus loves you and your baby. Let us help you!” As women approached the doors of clinics, Hoye would ask, “May I talk to you about alternatives to the clinic?”

Alameda Superior Court Judge Stuart Hing said that he would not have imposed a sentence or fine if Hoye had agreed to refrain from his pro-life activity outside clinics, but Hoye refused. The conviction was later overturned by an appellate court.

An African-American, Hoye is back in the spotlight for placing pro-life messages on billboards, targeting the high rate of abortions in the black community. The billboard campaign has run in Oakland and Los Angeles, as well as several other states.

A LifeNews.com article describes pro-abortion organizations objecting to the “race-based” content of the billboards. But Hoye responds that since 1973 more than 15 million abortions of preborn black children “have crippled the black community.” In fact, a February 2011 report from the Centers for Disease Control reports that nearly 35% of all abortions in the United States are preborn black babies, whereas African-Americans make up only 12.6% of the American population. In other words, black babies are aborted at three times the rate of other races, and comprise 30% of all abortions in the U.S.

The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled in favor of Oakland, California, pro-life activist and pastor Walter Hoye.

Hoye was arrested at a Planned Parenthood abortion clinic on charges of violating an Oakland ordinance that essentially required him to get permission before saying anything to women entering the clinic for an abortion.

“Several months ago the federal district court said the ordinance was constitutional -- and not only [that] was it constitutional, it was okay to prosecute Pastor Hoye but not the clinic volunteers who blocked him, surrounded him so that women can't talk to him,” says Cody.

As the attorney explains, that permitted only the pro-abortion view to be expressed. The case was appealed to the Ninth Circuit.

“They basically said that they agreed with Pastor Hoye that there were grave constitutional problems in the way in which the city had been enforcing the ordinance, and that based on the facts presented to the court their policy is constitutionally invalid and a content-based regulation of speech,” explains the spokeswoman.

The case is being sent back to the lower court for further consideration.

Another new campaign produced by black pro-life advocates says African-American political leaders have betrayed the black community with their support for abortion, which has destroyed millions of black Americans.

Catherine Davis, founder of the Restoration Project, has joined with other pro-life African-Americans to launch a new billboard today in downtown Atlanta. The “Betrayed” billboard calls attention to the pro-abortion views of many African-American leaders. The billboard is posted on the corner of Spring and Marietta Streets and is linked to www.abortioninthehood.com.

"Something is wrong,” Davis says, “when those elected to protect the interests of their constituents turn a blind eye to the horrific impact that abortion is wreaking on the black community. In New York City, for every 1,000 black babies born alive, 1,489 are aborted. In Washington, D.C. for every 100 black babies born alive, 165 are aborted. Something is wrong.”

Davis was instrumental in implementing another successful billboard awareness campaign in collaboration with Ryan Bomberger of the radiance Foundation and Georgia Right to Life.

Day Gardner of the National Black Prolife Union is also on board with the new project and asks: “Can’t we at least ask the hard questions about these numbers?”

“Pro-abortion groups cry racism when black pro-life leaders point out the depopulation effect of abortion,” she lamented. “I say yes racism is a factor, not on the part of pro-lifers, but on the part of those who want us to continually stream into the clinics to kill our children. All black leaders should help stop it or stay home.”

Star Parker from CURE is a member of the black pro-life coalition of leaders sponsoring the billboard.

“When you look at the data on what is occurring in our urban communities, you find that one out of every two and a half pregnancies is being terminated,” the nationally syndicated pro-life columnist says. “It is imperative that our leaders examine what we know is the targeting of black women and children. We don’t need to wait until it is too late like we did with the Tuskegee study, later looking back to ask why somebody didn’t do something.”

Dr. Alveda King of Priests for Life, the niece of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., chimed in as well and said: “It’s outrageous that Margaret Sanger’s Negro Project to control the birth rate of Blacks is alive and thriving today because so many black leaders have sold their constituents the lie that abortion is the key to emancipating African-American women. Abortion kills babies and hurts women and families. These pro-abortion voices are not the voices of Black America.”

As an OB/GYN who delivered over 4,000 babies, Ron Paul knows firsthand how precious, fragile, and in need of protection life is.

Dr. Paul’s experience in science and medicine only reinforced his belief that life begins at conception, and he believes it would be inconsistent for him to champion personal liberty and a free society if he didn’t also advocate respecting the God-given right to life—for those born and unborn.

After being forced to witness an abortion being performed during his time in medical school, he knew from that moment on that his practice would focus on protecting life. And during his years in medicine, never once did he find an abortion necessary to save the life of a pregnant woman.

As a physician, Ron Paul consistently put his beliefs into practice and saved lives by helping women seek options other than abortion, including adoption. And as President, Ron Paul will continue to fight for the same pro-life solutions he has upheld in Congress, including:

* Immediately saving lives by effectively repealing Roe v. Wade and preventing activist judges from interfering with state decisions on life by removing abortion from federal court jurisdiction through legislation modeled after his “We the People Act.”

* Defining life as beginning at conception by passing a “Sanctity of Life Act.”

Because he agrees with Thomas Jefferson that it is “sinful and tyrannical” to “compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors,” Ron Paul will also protect the American people’s freedom of conscience by working to prohibit taxpayer funds from being used for abortions, Planned Parenthood, or any other so-called “family planning” program.

The strength of love for liberty in our society can be judged by how we treat the most innocent among us. It’s time to elect a President with the courage and conviction to stand up for every American’s right to life.

Another new campaign produced by black pro-life advocates says African-American political leaders have betrayed the black community with their support for abortion, which has destroyed millions of black Americans.

Catherine Davis, founder of the Restoration Project, has joined with other pro-life African-Americans to launch a new billboard today in downtown Atlanta. The “Betrayed” billboard calls attention to the pro-abortion views of many African-American leaders. The billboard is posted on the corner of Spring and Marietta Streets and is linked to www.abortioninthehood.com.

"Something is wrong,” Davis says, “when those elected to protect the interests of their constituents turn a blind eye to the horrific impact that abortion is wreaking on the black community. In New York City, for every 1,000 black babies born alive, 1,489 are aborted. In Washington, D.C. for every 100 black babies born alive, 165 are aborted. Something is wrong.”

Davis was instrumental in implementing another successful billboard awareness campaign in collaboration with Ryan Bomberger of the radiance Foundation and Georgia Right to Life.

Day Gardner of the National Black Prolife Union is also on board with the new project and asks: “Can’t we at least ask the hard questions about these numbers?”

“Pro-abortion groups cry racism when black pro-life leaders point out the depopulation effect of abortion,” she lamented. “I say yes racism is a factor, not on the part of pro-lifers, but on the part of those who want us to continually stream into the clinics to kill our children. All black leaders should help stop it or stay home.”

Star Parker from CURE is a member of the black pro-life coalition of leaders sponsoring the billboard.

“When you look at the data on what is occurring in our urban communities, you find that one out of every two and a half pregnancies is being terminated,” the nationally syndicated pro-life columnist says. “It is imperative that our leaders examine what we know is the targeting of black women and children. We don’t need to wait until it is too late like we did with the Tuskegee study, later looking back to ask why somebody didn’t do something.”

Dr. Alveda King of Priests for Life, the niece of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., chimed in as well and said: “It’s outrageous that Margaret Sanger’s Negro Project to control the birth rate of Blacks is alive and thriving today because so many black leaders have sold their constituents the lie that abortion is the key to emancipating African-American women. Abortion kills babies and hurts women and families. These pro-abortion voices are not the voices of Black America.”

The purpose of this web site is to expose the disproportionate amount of Black babies destroyed by the abortion industry. For every two African American women that get pregnant one will choose to abort.A Black baby is 5 times more likely to be killed in the womb than a White Baby.

Statistics from The Alan Guttmaucher Institute

"Frankly I had thought that at that time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don't want to have too many of."

7/2/09 Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg

The most dangerous place for an African American to be is in the womb of their African American mother.

LSN: A number of pro-life leaders contend that the whole issue of abortion needs to be decided at the federal level rather than by the states. But you seem to think the issue of deciding abortion on a state-by-state basis would actually be to the advantage of the pro-life movement. Can you explain?

Paul: Well, because the fact that they want to do it at a federal level is a total failure. How many abortions have there been since 1973, since it was legalized by Roe v. Wade? So they don’t have any argument that that would be a better way. They would argue – and I would agree – that my suggestion is not perfect, because there would still be abortions done. But in some states there would be a lot less abortions done. That would be my argument.

LSN: But would not allowing the issue to come to the states, also give pro-lifers in those areas a lot more control and influence in the legislative process than they have at the federal level?

Paul: It would be a lot easier to change a state law than it would be to change a Supreme Court ruling. That would be a real encouragement for right to life activists, you know, to be involved.

Logged

And earthly power doth then show likest God'sWhen mercy seasons justice

In conjunction with Sunday’s dedication of the Martin Luther King Jr. National Memorial, his niece, Alveda King, will present the pro-life message at an event at the offices of the Family Research Council.

King, who is the full-time director of African-American Outreach for Priests for Life, a Catholic pro-life group, will host a panel discussion and video presentation on Saturday at 11:00 a.m. “Redeem the Dream: The State of the Quality of Life in the 21st Century,” will present a frank assessment of how far African-Americans have come since Martin Luther King gave his famous “I Have a Dream” speech on August 28, 1963, and how the dream has been imperiled by the abortion industry.

“The murder of millions of African-American babies by abortion was not something my Uncle Martin envisioned or would ever have supported,” King said in a statement to LifeNews. “He was unequivocally pro-life, and it would break his heart to know that so many African-American leaders endorse freedom of choice over the right to life.”

“As people gather in the nation’s capital to remember and celebrate the life of my Uncle Martin, it is an opportune moment to declare that were he here today, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. would be standing with those working to stop the violence of abortion against children in the womb and restore them to equal protection under the law,” King said.

It’s no secret that the establishment press continues to serve as a virtual PR mouthpiece for Planned Parenthood. Among the canards employed in its defense is that the organization provides a wondrous array of reproductive health services.

Abby Johnson, a former Texas facility director for the organization and others have shown that abortion constitutes 98% of such “services,” and that taxpayer funds which aren’t supposed to pay for abortions are routinely “combined into one pot, not set aside for specific services.”

For several years, Life Dynamics Incorporated has documented an even more sinister aspect of Planned Parenthood and the abortion industry which its press defenders steadfastly refuse to call out, namely that it takes the lives of a disproportionate number of pre-born African-American and Hispanic babies. A new study by LDI (“Racial Targeting and Population Control”) shows that this result is no accident, as, in LDI’s words, “family planning” clinics “are disproportionately placed into minority neighborhoods” (full PDF report; HT Life News; bolds are mine throughout; internal link added by me):

A new pro-life billboard campaign in California has a clear message for the African-American community: Fatherhood begins in the womb. That’s what a group of black pro-life advocates want people to know.

Walter Hoye, a pro-life African-American pastor, teamed up with Radiance Foundation founder Ryan Bomberger, a LifeNews blogger who is a black pro-life and adoption advocate, for the new professional billboard campaign.

The Radiance Foundation, partnering with the Issues4Life Foundation, announces a powerful new billboard/web campaign to illuminate the crisis of fatherlessness. The new TooManyAborted.com billboards, “Fatherhood begins in the womb”, have been placed in Sacramento, California, the state that has aborted 214,190 of its children in the last reported year, Bomberger says.

“When a child is conceived, a father is born,” Bomberger told LifeNews.

“The abortion industry has created a culture of abandonment. Responsibility has become someone else’s concern, and death the solution to ‘unplanned’ pregnancies–the natural result of sexual behavior,” Bomberger explains. “There’s nothing natural about an industry that generates over $200 million, annually, by killing a child left defenseless by the absence of a father.”

Hoye says the billboard campaign focuses on the most missing component of the national abortion debate: fathers. He said the campaign details the culture of abandonment that abortion has created by revealing the statistics of fatherlessness, single-parent poverty, and the deterioration of two-parent married households.

“When a man has sex with a woman he is consenting to being a father,” Hoye says. “We want to emphasize the biblical requirement and vital need for men to be involved as providers and protectors when life happens.”

“In the mid 60s, an alarming 25% of black children were born to single mothers. Today, 41% of all U.S. children (72.3% of black children and 35.7% of white children) are born to unmarried households. This is a major crisis,” Hoye adds.

The Washington Post, as most mainstream media outlets, suffers from a common ailment among journalists: cluelessness. Eugenically speaking, they did Margaret Sanger proud.

This week they lamented the prospect that less Black and Hispanic babies would be killed if Virginia’s abortion clinics were forced to abide by the same construction & design rules as real healthcare facilities. See what happens when you co-opt language? Planned Parenthood touts itself as a healthcare provider then protests when they are held to the same standards. Granted, one can make a lot of money aborting children if they have squalid conditions like Philly abortionist Kermit Gosnell.

Regulations just get in the way of profit. Gosnell’s horrid clinic conditions didn’t bother abortion groups who were unmoved to action by the butchery, sterilization, and post birth homicides that occurred for over ten years in this unregulated clinic. But then again, Gosnell killed mostly minority babies who needed (apparently according to the silence of NARAL, NAF and Planned Parenthood) the kind of reproductive justice he was serving. Gosnell’s methods and clinic conditions were not the exception, as evidenced by numerous others throughout the country that defied scrutiny because states failed to inspect or regulate them.

The Washington Post Editorial Board, doubtfully made up of low-income individuals, made the following doom-filled prophecy: “The main victims of choking off the availability of abortions will be poor African Americans and Hispanics, who account for a majority of women who undergo abortions nationwide.” Yes, those poor minorities. Just can’t kill enough of them before they’re born. I can’t help but notice how peculiar their metaphorical use of death is in a situation where 72 unborn children actually die by abortion, needlessly, on a daily basis in Virginia. No matter the race, abortion is an avoidable tragedy.

Perhaps the Post is too preoccupied with posting Op-Eds by Planned Parenthood personnel than looking into why abortions occur in the black community at 5 times the rate of the majority population. But don’t bother to get those reasons from the Guttmacher Institute. They have a serious conflict of interest, in the receipt of over $2.1 million of Planned Parenthood funding since 2004, as they defend the nation’s largest abortion chain. Guttmacher contradicts itself claiming that more low-income women are having abortions today, 4 out of 10, than ten years ago. But ten years ago, they reported that more than 5 out of 10 [.pdf] low-income women accounted for all abortions.

Today’s post is a review of an article on Jezebel, in which a pro-choicer describes visiting a pregnancy help center, viewing her unborn baby on a sonogram, and then having an abortion. The author now rails against pregnancy centers.

What I see above all in this story is a deep-seated grief that has been transformed into misdirected anger as a psychological defense mechanism. I cannot emphasize enough that I do not intend to demonize this woman. We all experience misdirected anger at times. But I think it’s important for us to examine this closely, to try to understand the whirlwind of emotion, so that we can serve women in crisis pregnancies better.

The author was a 21-year-old pro-choicer who thought that she was only a couple weeks pregnant, and planned to take an abortion pill. But she learned from the pregnancy center that she was actually three and a half months along. They provided her with a sonogram, which confronted her with the humanity of her unborn baby:

Then she turned the monitor to me. I have so many little brothers and sisters. I was with my mother the first time she heard my younger siblings heartbeat. There was a heartbeat now, too.

. . .

I clutched my hand to my stomach and in the sonogram screen, an arm lifted. I took my arm away and the arm went back down. “Put your hand back up!” the older woman said. I did, and the tiny hand went up again. That’s the moment that I can’t get out of my head, to this day.

After speaking with a counselor, she was considering the possibility that she “could be a good mother.” But she was ambivalent, and didn’t make a follow-up appointment. She returned home, to a boyfriend who was eager to “take care of it.” He took the sonogram printout and hid it from her–-but it was too late to undo her knowledge.

For me, the real anger didn’t come until later when I actually went through with the abortion. I’m not saying it’s ever easy for anyone, but all I could think about that day was the sonogram and that hand. There were tears streaming down my face when I was going under. I remember the anesthesiologist telling me, “Don’t worry, it won’t hurt,” and I remember thinking, That’s not what I’m crying about.

Of course, she was crying about the fact that her child–-whose movements she watched, whose heartbeat she heard–-was about to die.

But this self-insight is fleeting. She apparently thinks that if only she had been able to maintain her ignorance of human development, everything would have been fine. She blames the pregnancy center for allowing her to see the situation for what it really was. And now, she wants to impose her wished-for ignorance on other women by fighting sonogram laws.

Some things are just too much for the human heart to handle, and the knowledge that you’re responsible for the death of a real live human being is one of them. She initially felt that the pregnancy center volunteers were honest and kind. But she can no longer feel that way, not after making the decision she made. And so, she demonizes the pregnancy center movement in an effort to avoid her grief. It isn’t working, though: she says that “It’s taken me the two years since [the abortion] not to break down every time I think about it.”

Republican presidential candidate Rep. Ron Paul is airing a new ad in key primary states that ignores his well-known libertarian views on issues like foreign policy and instead focuses on his social conservatism — namely, his strong views opposing abortion.

Actress Kathleen Turner is keynoting a Planned Parenthood fundraiser next week in what is the latest action by the actress to promote abortion and the nation’s biggest abortion business.

Turner, who came to fame in the 1980s with starring role in moves such as Body Heat, Peggy Sue Got Married, Romancing the Stone, The War of the Roses, Who Framed Roger Rabbit and Prizzi’s Honor, takes the stage in a different role on November 14 at Planned Parenthood Mohawk Hudson’s annual fundraising banquet in Saratoga Springs, New York.

The abortion business says it expect more than 180 guests to attend this event at the National Museum of Racing and Hall of Fame where tickets run $75 apiece. At the event, Planned Parenthood will award three local pro-abortion activists with the “Giraffe Award,” which recognizes them for “sticking their necks out” for abortion.

Turner is the Chair of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America Board of Advocates and has appeared in their TV and radio ad campaigns that actively lobbied for the organization in Washington. Turner previously donated her book Send Yourself Roses for a Planned Parenthood fundraising event.

An astounding new video is drawing rave reviews from pro-life advocates around the world for its depiction of the fetal development of an unborn baby.

The new video on YouTube features Alexander Tsiaras, the author of From Conception to Birth: A Life Unfolds, presenting a video he helped develop which shows a visualization of the unborn child’s development from conception to birth. The video already has nearly 80,000 views even though it was only uploaded to YouTube on November 14.

According to its website, “for more than 90 years, Planned Parenthood has promoted a commonsense approach to women’s health and well-being, based on respect for each individual’s right to make informed, independent decisions about health, sex, and family planning.”

There is in this glowing self-endorsement a subtle tribute to Planned Parenthood’s founder Margaret Sanger. An unabashed eugenicist, Ms. Sanger’s “commonsense” approach to unwanted pregnancies and undesirable demographic groups, such as minorities and the handicapped, was clear and unambiguous. She maintained that “the most merciful thing that a family does to one of its infant members is to kill it,” and that “birth control must lead ultimately to a cleaner race.”

Sanger would, no doubt, be proud of the legacy begotten by her monstrous ideology. Planned Parenthood is by far the largest abortion provider in the United States. In 2009, surgical abortions accounted for 97.6% of their services to pregnant women. In other words, “Planned Parenthood” has become a euphemism for “the abortion business yields big bucks.” It might tout itself as a “commonsense” organization that provides a wide array of family planning services, but the truth is in the statistics.

There is one major difference between the Planned Parenthood of today and that of Margaret Sanger’s time: Margaret Sanger was brutally honest about her disregard for the unborn, while contemporary abortion advocates hide behind the language of “choice” in order to disguise the ugly reality of what they advocate. Unfortunately, this campaign of misdirection has been wildly successful. Many women instinctively rally behind a woman’s “right to choose,” without giving much thought to the reality behind the choice at issue. In the abortion debate, we aren’t talking about choosing between chocolate or vanilla, fried or scrambled, with fries or without. We are talking about choosing whether a baby will live or die, whether we will kill it or give it life, whether we will destroy or protect an innocent child.

So powerful has our delusion about the reality of abortion become – and so powerful the pro-abortion lobby behind Planned Parenthood – that our elected representatives allocate hundreds of millions of dollars each year to Planned Parenthood. This funding has withstood year after year of budget debates and political controversy. Make no mistake about it, however, that money is blood money. Planned Parenthood preys on the fear and ignorance of women faced with unplanned pregnancies as a means of advancing their twisted worldview. Instead of celebrating life as a blessing, even when unplanned, Planned Parenthood’s operatives peddle the myth that pregnancy and parenthood is some kind misogynistic social construct used to keep women dependent and servile. They tell women that the right to choose abortion is a right intricately tied to their female identity, rather than a betrayal of a sacred duty bestowed by the author of the universe. They tell women that choosing abortion is an empowering decision, not one that can impact future fertility and inflict emotional and psychological scars that last a lifetime.

Every single day, a silent horror kills more Americans than were killed on 9/11. Every single year, this silent horror kills about as many Americans as have been killed on all the battlefields in all of the wars in U.S. history combined. This silent horror is called abortion, and it is a national disgrace. Overall, more than 50 million babies have been slaughtered since Roe v. Wade was decided in 1973. We have become a nation with so little regard for human life that nobody even really talks that much about this issue anymore. But the truth is that it is at the very core of what is wrong with America. As I have written about previously, we have become a nation that is obsessed with population control, and we have been exporting this sick philosophy all over the globe. As you read this, there are workers from U.S. organizations and UN organizations (both funded by your tax dollars) that are on the other side of the world setting up “family planning services” for women in poor countries. The goal of these organizations (just like we see in the United States) is to reduce the number of poor children being born. The sick control freaks that run things have decided that overpopulation is a plague that must be eradicated and that mass murder is the answer. Unfortunately, there are very few people that are still willing to speak out strongly against abortion in America. So the carnage is just going to go on and on and on.

What will the history books say about a nation that murdered 50 million of its own babies?

The following are 19 facts about abortion in America that should make you very sick….

When do we get to euthanize the medical ethicists who say murdering newborn babies is good for society?

Mike AdamsNatural NewsMarch 2, 2012

In an article published in the Journal of Medical Ethics, scientists argue that killing newborn babies is ethically no different than abortion and should therefore be openly allowed in society. The paper says newborn babies are not “actual persons” and that they do not have “a moral right to life.” (See sources, below.)

The authors of the article are mainstream medicine ethicists named Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva. One is a former Oxford scholar. In their paper, they argue “The moral status of an infant is equivalent to that of a fetus in the sense that both lack those properties that justify the attribution of a right to life to an individual.”

Several death threats have been leveled against the scientists, although it’s hard to actually call them “death” threats since scientists who recognize no sense of life in newborn babies can’t possibly be living themselves, right? At best, Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva are mindless zombies, so whacking off their heads with a chainsaw would seemingly be no more meaningful than turning off the switch to a hollow sack of skin that contains no soul.

I’m being sarcastic, of course, by using their own mad reasoning against them. They call the murder of infants nothing more than “after-birth abortion” and declare that “it should be permissible in all the cases where abortion is.”

Can we still abort these scientists? Or is it too late for that?

Finally out in the open: The mass murder / eugenics agenda of abortion pushers

In one sense, it sure is refreshing to see all this admitted for a change. Instead of hiding behind the false explanations and excuse-making that we normally hear from the abortion crowd, we now get an uncensored, heartless attack on human life wrapped in a “scientific” paper of such arrogance and destruction that it can only make you wonder just how totally mad the medical scientists have now become.

If a human baby has no value to them, then probably neither does a young tree, or a newborn wild animal, or a seed sprout. Life is not sacred to the conventional medical industry; it is merely something to be exploited for power and profit. This is precisely the ethical context under which GMOs are pushed… or chemotherapy, or even vaccines.

Aborted Babies Are Being Chopped Up And Sold To Researchers All Over America

With The Full Approval Of The Obama Administration

The American DreamTuesday, March 20, 2012

Did you know that aborted babies are being chopped up and sold to medical researchers all over America? There is a federal law which is supposed to ban this practice, but it contains a gigantic loophole that abortion clinics are using to sell huge amounts of aborted baby parts to the scientific community. The loophole in the federal law allows “reasonable payments associated with the transportation, implantation, processing, preservation, quality control, or storage of human fetal tissue.” But there are no guidelines as to what those “reasonable payments” should be and the Obama administration is not about to start prosecuting abortion clinics. So aborted baby parts from American babies will continue to be very quietly sold for profit to medical researchers and most Americans will never hear anything about it. But future generations will look back in horror at what we allowed to be done right under our noses.

With the full approval of the Obama administration, one company in the United States has plans to inject aborted baby brain cells into the eyes of patients to see if that will help improve their vision. The following is from a recent article on LifeNews.com....

Scott Fischbach, the director of Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life uncovered the information showing a clinical trial approved by the Food and Drug Administration uses brain tissue from aborted unborn babies to treat macular degeneration. StemCells Inc. will inject fetal brain stem cells into the eyes of up to 16 patients to study the cells’ effect on vision.

As Fischbach correctly notes, a fetus must be at a certain stage of development before brain tissue can be harvested for this kind of research....

“StemCells Inc. is not using embryonic stem cells. A five-day-old human being at the embryonic stage does not have a brain, but a fetus at 10 or 20 weeks of development with visible fingers, toes and ears has a functioning brain,” said Fischbach. “Developing human beings in the womb are treated simply as raw material for laboratory experimentation by StemCells Inc. and other companies seeking to monetize aborted unborn children.”

But the harvesting of tissue and organs from aborted babies is definitely not new. It has been going on for a long time.

For example, a recent article posted on worldmag.com describes the very big business that the Birth Defects Research Laboratory at the University of Washington in Seattle does in aborted baby parts....

It’s known within the research community as a top government distributor of fetal tissue. Last year the Puget Sound Business Journal stated the lab “in 2009 filled more than 4,400 requests for fetal tissue and cell lines.”

The lab’s grant records indicate it received $579,091 from the NIH last year. To date, it has retrieved the products of 22,000 pregnancies. According to a description the lab provided in its most recent grant applications, an increase in nonsurgical abortion methods has “created new obstacles to obtaining sufficient amounts of high quality tissue. To overcome these problems and meet increasing demand, the Laboratory has developed new relationships with both local and distant clinics.”

Once again, it is supposed to be against federal law to buy aborted baby parts from abortion clinics. But this “problem” is avoided by taking advantage of the loophole that allows for “reasonable payments associated with the transportation, implantation, processing, preservation, quality control, or storage of human fetal tissue.”

1) A baby parts “wholesaler” enters into a financial agreement with an abortion clinic in which the wholesaler pays a monthly “site fee” to the clinic. For this payment, the wholesaler is allowed to place a retrieval agent inside the clinic where he or she is given access to the corpses of children killed there and a workspace to harvest their parts. In most cases, this retrieval agent is an employee of the wholesaler. In other instances, the retrieval agent is a clinic employee who was trained by the wholesaler.

2) The buyer – usually a researcher working for a medical school, pharmaceutical company, bio-tech company or government agency – supplies the wholesaler with a list of the baby parts wanted.

3) When such orders are received by the wholesaler, they are faxed to the retrieval agent at the clinic who harvests the requested parts and ships them to the buyer via FedEx, Airborne or a similar common carrier.

4) These parts are “donated” by the clinic to the wholesaler who turns around and “donates” them to the buyer. The buyer then “reimburses” the wholesaler for the cost of retrieving the parts.

In the end, nobody is technically “buying or selling” anything but they all get what they want and a lot of money changes hands.

A number of years ago an abortion industry insider came forward with shocking details of how this organ harvesting operation actually functions. The following is from a very eye-opening InvestigateDaily article....

It was an interview that shocked America. An Insider, spilling the beans on massive malpractice to a reporter on ABC’s 20/20. Only this time, it wasn’t Big Tobacco in the gunsights, it was the US abortion industry, exposed as harvesting the organs from aborted babies. According to former abortion clinic technician Dean Alberty, clinics were harvesting eyes, brains, hearts, limbs, torsos and other body parts for sale to the scientific market: laboratories wanting to test new drugs or procedures, or researchers trying to find the causes of genetic disorders or discover new ways of treating disorders like Parkinsons.

Sometimes babies actually survive the initial abortion procedure and workers actually have to kill the babies themselvesbefore harvesting the organs....

Alberty worked for a Maryland agency called the Anatomic Gift Foundation, which essentially acted as a brokerage between universities and researchers seeking body parts, and the abortion clinics providing the raw material. Alerted by the clinics about the races and gestations of babies due to be aborted each day, AGF technicians would match the offerings with parts orders on their client lists. Alberty and his colleagues would turn up at the abortions that offered the best donor prospects to begin dissecting and extracting what they needed before decay set in.

“We would have a contract with an abortion clinic that would allow us to go in…(to) procure fetal tissue for research. We would get a generated list each day to tell us what tissue researchers, pharmaceuticals and universities were looking for. Then we would go and look at the particular patient charts—we had to screen out anyone who had STDs or fetal anomalies. These had to be the most perfect specimens we could give these researchers for the best value that we could sell for.

“We were taking eyes, livers, brains, thymuses, and especially cardiac blood…even blood from the limbs that we would get from the veins” he said.

Alberty told of seeing babies wounded but alive after abortion procedures, and in one case a set of twins “still moving on the table” when clinicians from AGF began dissecting the children to harvest their organs. The children, he said, were “cuddling each other” and “gasping for breath” when medics moved in for the kill.

This is a hard article to write, but the American people need to be confronted with the truth. If we ignore the horrors going on right under our noses, then that would make us just like so many of the other nightmarish societies throughout history that we rightly condemn.

Can’t happen here? Top academics and eugenicists are calling for what Obama’s science czar once advocated

Paul Joseph WatsonPrison Planet.comThursday, March 29, 2012

This is the shocking face of China’s brutal one child policy which many academics and pressure groups are now calling to be imposed in the west – the image shows a 9 month old baby lying dead in a bucket, forcibly aborted by Chinese family planning authorities in the town of Moshan, Shandong province.

Because the parents of the baby already had a child, they were hunted down and forced to comply with China’s draconian one child policy. The mother was injected with a poison that induced an abortion, but after the baby was “pulled out inhumanly like a piece of meat,” it was still alive and began to cry before doctors slung the defenseless child into a bucket and left it to die.

The time stamp on the image tells us the baby was killed on Monday. The image began circulating today on Weibo, China’s version of Twitter, which has around 260 million members. The story has attracted widespread revulsion directed against the family planning authorities responsible for the murder of the baby.

China’s one child policy is enforced by way of forced abortions, infanticide and compulsory sterilization. In many cases, women are literally kidnapped off the street by state goons from the “Birth Control Office,” driven to government hospitals, drugged, and their child is forcibly aborted.

In one case in 2009, both a young woman and her baby were killed after such an abduction in Liaocheng City.

“According to a Doctor at the hospital where the two died, the young woman was kidnapped by the “Birth Control Office” and taken to the hospital where she was forced to undergo an abortion procedure,” reported the Epoch Times.

“The young woman fought with staff to protect her unborn child however a half a dozen men, pushed her down on a bed and injected her with a drug to induce labor. After the young woman had a still birth, she developed a massive hemorrhage and soon thereafter died.”

The practice of infanticide has its origins in barbaric eras of ancient history, but it is still common is many areas of the world today, including China where the one child policy allied with the social pressure to have boys has resulted in a massive imbalance in the population. Studies have found that 40 million girls are ‘missing’ in China as a result of gender-selective abortion and infanticide. In India, there are 50 million less females for the same reasons.

Advocates of population control, which is nothing more than a disguise for modern day eugenics, have long pressured for the one child policy to be enforced in the west. In 2009, an article written in Canada’s National Post argued for “A planetary law, such as China’s one-child policy, is the only way to reverse the disastrous global birthrate.”

In his 1977 book Ecoscience, current White House science czar John P. Holdren floated the idea of forced abortions and compulsory sterilization, amongst a raft of other draconian population control measures, all of which would be carried out by a “Planetary Regime”.

As we reported last month, a paper published in the Journal of Medical Ethics authored by top academics at the University of Melbourne argued that abortion should be extended to make the killing of newborn babies permissible, even if the baby is perfectly healthy.

The authors argued that “both fetuses and newborns do not have the same moral status as actual persons,” and that because abortion is allowed even when there is no problem with the fetus’ health, “killing a newborn should be permissible in all the cases where abortion is, including cases where the newborn is not disabled.”